Ridicule not helpful in evolution debate

I have a few comments regarding Terry Alexander’s letter in the Aug. 15 edition. His ridicule emulates many evolutionists who use this form of communication in an attempt to silence any criticism of their belief in evolution. His cause would be better served if he used science to show where Pastor Huck might be wrong. Since when did ridicule decide what is scientific?

I applaud Pastor Huck for trying to address the issue of evolution. Most pastors won’t touch it because they don’t usually have a strong science background and there are plenty of people out there willing to ridicule them for challenging evolution. It is well worth noting that there is strong scientific evidence against evolution. The concept of irreducible complexity which Pastor Huck referred to is one of them. In a nutshell it says that certain complex organs or functions cannot evolve because there is no advantage to the organism until the complete function is in place.

Natural selection will not favor the individual results of the many mutation steps required for the function to work. This is just applying basic scientific knowledge. I am not aware of any scientifically sound arguments against irreducible complexity. Why are evolutionists so determined to keep this sort of thing out of the public schools? Is it just because it challenges their beliefs?

Keep in mind that some evidence for a young Earth will be shown to be doubtful just like some evidences for an old Earth have been shown to be doubtful. Open, free, discussion without sarcasm and ridicule is the right way to learn and then choose what you believe.

Mark Struebel
Desert Hills